Dear All,
I wonder if the scope note of J2 concluded that should be:
Scope note: " This property associates an instance of I2 Belief
with the instance of I1 Argumentation that concluded it."
Or should be:
Scope note: " This property associates an instance of I2 Belief
with the
Dear Oeyvind,
Well, I expressed just a more theoretical thought. There is a question
of identity conditions: Is the product providing the identity to the
activity, or the activity to the product? If the products are more
loosely coupled such as multiple recordings, reviews etc., obviously the
Dear Franco,
Sure :-))
Done!
A.
> Il giorno 18 set 2018, alle ore 15:04, Franco Niccolucci
> ha scritto:
>
> Achille,
>
> maybe you have a more recent draft version - the one being reviewed by Steve
> for some time now - which might be more useful to Christian-Emil than the
> outdated one
Achille,
maybe you have a more recent draft version - the one being reviewed by Steve
for some time now - which might be more useful to Christian-Emil than the
outdated one publicly available. If so, you could send it directly to him (and
not to the list).
Franco
Prof. Franco Niccolucci
Dire
Dear Christian-Emil,
As you might have guessed, CMRarchaeo’s documentation is still a work in
progress and many efforts are currently taking place to improve and finalise
it. In particular, version 1.4.5 has already been extended with new real cases
and examples, and many scope notes have been
Well, performances are usually not part of library or museum collections. The
theatre museums I have worked with collect artefacts, texts, stage models etc.
etc. but not performances. They do collect traces of performances though:
reviews, programmes, posters, stage drawings, costumes, video rec
Right, so we are defining a new CRM property, with domain E90 Symbolic Object
and range E62 String. Agreed? I suggest that we call it "Pxxx has string
value" to make its purpose clearer.
E62 String is defined more widely than the strings we are currently
considering: it includes "bitmaps, vec
Dear all,
I participate in an archeological infrastructure project (financed by the
Norwegian Research Council) for data from archaeological excavations in Norway.
The objectives is to link datasets form excavations, museum collections and
archives. My task is to plan the use of CIDOC-CRM and
Dear George,
How nice!
I believe the concept of "Expression" as something permanent, i.e., the
FRBR concept of it, actually confuses the problem. "Expression" is to my
understanding a process, an activity, and only in a second meaning the
product. I do not see any difference to lots of best s
LRM-E4 Manifestation is talking about sets of "carriers" which I think
is fine. LRM-E5 Item is defined as:
"An object or objects carrying signs intended to convey intellectual or
artistic content."
which may be problematic, especially when the scope note refers to a
"portion of the disk" for dig
Dear Martin,
I can confirm that having symbolic content as subclass of rdf:value would
incredibly help!!
Best,
Nicola
> On 17 Sep 2018, at 21:38, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>
>
> Examples I have a lot of!
>
>
> How about …
>
> * The materials description (E33) of the painting
11 matches
Mail list logo
